PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3564-3565)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 25, 1999
Reconstitutes and reauthorizes the Senate Arms Control Observer Group as the Senate National Security Working Group. Modifies the Working Group's authority, including by directing the Group to act as official observers on the U.S. delegation to any negotiations to which the United States is a party on: (1) reduction, limitation, or control of conventional weapons, weapons of mass destruction, or the means for delivery of any such weapons; (2) reduction, limitation, or control of missile defenses; and (3) export controls. Encourages the Working Group to consult with legislators of foreign nations regarding such matters. Excludes from such authority the investigation of intelligence matters. Revises provisions regarding the composition of the Working Group. Increases the amount of money to be expended for staff and expenses.
People & committees
Sen. Lott, Trent [R-MS] · R–MS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3564-3565)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S3564-3565)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.Res.75 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.Res.75 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.Res.75 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.Res.75 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.